Wladimir Klitschko has taken a lot of "0"s in his career

[LacedUp]

Who has Povetkin beaten?

Well, Povetkin actually has the best resume of any heavyweight not named Klitschko. That much is clear. If Wlad had fought like a champion in that fight I would have given him more credit.

I mean, Povetkin fought an unbeaten Eddie Chambers when Povetkin was a Pro novice. This was the time when Povetkin still kind of fought like an amateur. I remember that fight, he fought his heart out throwing 80 punches a round and really really giving his all. I was very impressed with him.

Povetkin hasn't had an easy ride in the pros man, he's come up tough. Larry Donald, Ed Mahone - Solid gate keepers in his first whatever fights.

Then fights unbeaten top ranked opponent in Chambers only to take on a former champion Chris Byrd. Follows up with solid wins over Chagaev, Boswell and Marco Huck (however dubious you think that decision was). Then fights unbeaten Wawrzyk who wasn't much but was discussed as a potential Klitschko "stay busy" fight at the time.

He CLEARLY deserved a shot at Klitschko and has since followed his loss up with 3 really solid wins.

Povetkin is a top heavyweight man and he deserves respect for not being one of these guys with padded records.

[The Hammer]

This...a fighter is judged by who they beat. Who has Povetkin beaten? Just because he is supposedly bigger than previous heavyweights..well some previous heavyweights anyway. What make Povetkin so dangerous? Made to look **** by Wlad?

He won two world championships in the amateurs, beating all the best HW's in the world, but to you that means nothing.

He's beaten several HW contenders who were in the Ring top ten at the time (Takam, Chambers, Chagaev, etc). Of course you'll just say they were all no good, because it fits with your agenda.

Chageav is a small heavyweight by most standards, what would make him so dangerous in the 70s or mid 90s? Considering your criteria is size.

Chagaev at age 17 beat Felix Savon, who went on to win Olympic gold three years later.

He was world amateur champ in 2001. He defeated Valuev more clearly than David Haye did.

And if Wlad can be KOd by smaller guys who are nothing more than journeymen, what do you think makes him a lasting possibility or a winner against monstrous punchers like Foreman, Tyson, Frazier, Shavers etc.

Klitschko hasn't even been knocked down in ten years, do you really near to reach back that far to discredit him?

[soul_survivor]

He won two world championships in the amateurs, beating all the best HW's in the world, but to you that means nothing.

He's beaten several HW contenders who were in the Ring top ten at the time (Takam, Chambers, Chagaev, etc). Of course you'll just say they were all no good, because it fits with your agenda.

Chagaev at age 17 beat Felix Savon, who went on to win Olympic gold three years later.

He was world amateur champ in 2001. H defeated Valuev more clearly than David Haye did.

Klitschko hasn't even been knocked down in ten years, do you really near to reach back that far to discredit him?

Why are you bringing amateurs into this? It's completely different to the pro game, especially in the 90s and most of the last decade with head gear and body shots not counting. Anyway, most of the heavyweight champs of the past were olympic or junior olympic champions or medallists.

And are you seriously going to claim that that Takam, Chambers and Chagaev are a murderers row? Heck, when he beat Chagaev, it was for a vacant version of the WBA strap...even though Wlad is the real champion in that organisation. Not to mention Chagaev was years past his best by now.

You're all argument was that heavyweights are bigger now so they are better...yet a small heavyweight in chagaev beat the biggest heavyweight in history and Chagaev is moderately skilled when compared to the guys I've mentioned previously. You're falling over yourself and your own argument. It holds no weight. Let it go.

[STEELHEAD]

Has any heavyweight champion in history taken as many "0"s as Wladimir Klitschko?

Jennings
Pulev
Povetkin
Pianeta
Wach
Chagaev
Ibragimov
Brock
Peter
Castillo
Vujecic
Shaheed

I realize some of those guys like Shaheed on the list were not very good, but it's still impressive for any boxer to defeat so many opponents who had never lost before.

And some were very good, for example Povetkin, Jennings, Pulev, Brock, Chagaev (at that time), and Ibragimov.

Has any heavyweight champion in history taken as many "0"s as Wladimir Klitschko during the weakest heavyweight division in history.
edit: oh i see others have made the same point as i.

edit: garantee the boxing history books are going to point this out.

[Elroy1]

Don't be silly, Elroy.

I'm sorry Yoz but there is no other HW boxer who has beaten so many quality opponents.

It's just a fact!

[The Hammer]

Will Tyson Fury be the best "0" on Klitschko's resume?

[Fury4daWIN]

Will Tyson Fury be the best "0" on Klitschko's resume?

No, that still probably Povetkin. He might be the toughest 0 to take, though.

[yoz]

No, that still probably Povetkin. He might be the toughest 0 to take, though.

Yes, I agree.

[Fury4daWIN]

Peter, Chagaev, Ibragimov, Brock & Povetkin (despite the nature of the fight) were his best and most impressive undefeated wins imo.

The Peter fight is probably his best win of all.

Hard to say how good Brock was considering he hadn't really fought too many good names beforehand and did next to nothing after the defeat. I'd put Pulev and Jennings above him as more important wins, though you could argue that Jennings is on a similar level to Brock at the moment and that Wlad wasn't particularly impressive in beating him. Pulev is definitely a better scalp, both as a name and in the manner in which he was defeated.

[The Hammer]

though you could argue that Jennings is on a similar level to Brock at the moment and that Wlad wasn't particularly impressive in beating him.

For an age 39 champ to beat a hungry, talented prime HW like Jennings is always impressive, even though Klitschko didn't dominate like he has in past fights.